First Amendment Commons^™

Of Burning Houses And Roasting Pigs: Why Butler V. Michigan Remains A Key Free Speech Victory More Than A Half-Century Later, Clay Calvert

Federal Communications Law Journal

More than fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its unanimous decision in Butler v. Michigan, the case remains a pivotal-if unheralded and perhaps underappreciated-victory for freedom of speech. This Article analyzes the Butler principle and demonstrates how courts repeatedly apply it across different media platforms and in a myriad of factually distinct contexts, ranging from prohibitions on the sale of sex toys to bans on beer bottles with offensive labels. The Article initially provides an in-depth look at Butler, drawing on literary scholarship, historical newspaper articles from the time of the case, and other sources. It then illustrates …

A "Pay Or Play" Experiment To Improve Children's Educational Television, Lili Levi

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article addresses both the constitutionality and the efficacy of the FCC's current rules that require broadcasters to air children's educational programming. It argues that, even though the rules would probably pass muster under the First Amendment, they should nevertheless be substantially revised.

Empirical studies show mixed results, with substantial amounts of educationally insufficient programming. This is predictable-attributable to broadcaster incentives, limits on the FCC's enforcement capacities, and audience factors. Instead, the Article advises a turn away from programming mandates. It proposes a "pay or play" approach that allows broadcasters to pay a fee to a fund for high-quality public …

Rethinking Regulation Of Advertising Aimed At Children, William A. Ramsey

Federal Communications Law Journal

In 1990, Congress passed the Children's Television Act ("CTA"), which directed the FCC to establish standards for broadcasters regarding the amount of children's programming aired and to enforce limits on the amount of commercial time aired during children's programming. The limits are meant to protect children from various harms caused by advertising aimed at children. This Note examines the constitutionality and the effectiveness of these commercial limits. The Note concludes that while the CTA's commercial limits are probably constitutional under the Court's test for regulations of commercial speech, the limits do not provide children with adequate protection from the harms …

Discriminatory Filtering: Cipa's Effect On Our Nation's Youth And Why The Supreme Court Erred In Upholding The Constitutionality Of The Children's Internet Protection Act, Katherine A. Miltner

Federal Communications Law Journal

Congress introduced the Children's Internet Protection Act ("CIPA") in order to filter obscene and indecent material in response to a perceived threat to members of the public, specifically minors, who are exposed to pornographic material on the Internet. The provisions of CIPA have provoked tension between two competing interests: protecting minors from cyberpornography, and safeguarding First Amendment rights. This Note argues that the Supreme Court erred by upholding the constitutionality of CIPA. As a result of the Supreme Court's decision, the nation's youth will have restricted access to constitutionally protected information. The Court improperly relied on a provision of the …

The U.S. Supreme Court Addresses The Child Pornography Prevention Act And Child Online Protection Act In Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition And Ashcroft V. American Civil Liberties Union, Sue Ann Mota

Federal Communications Law Journal

Both the Child Pornography Prevention Act ("CPPA") and the Child Online Protection Act ("COPA") were intended by Congress to protect minors. The CPPA was intended to protect minors from the harmful effects of virtual child pornography. The COPA was intended to protect minors from pornography currently available commercially on the World Wide Web. However, in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of both statutes: The Court struck down sections of the CPPA as overbroad and unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. In Ashcroft v. ACLU, the Court upheld some sections of COPA as not unconstitutionally overbroad, but …

Does Censorship Really Protect Children?, Michael Grossberg

Federal Communications Law Journal

Book Review: Not In Front of the Children, “Indecency,” Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth, Marjorie Heins, New York: Hill and Wang, 2001, 402 pages.

Marjorie Heins spent much of her career as a lawyer battling censorship with the American Civil Liberties Union. Today, she continues the fight as Director of the Free Expression Policy Project of the National Coalition Against Censorship. In an effort to understand the people who work to constrict the free flow of information, she stepped out of the trenches and into the library to do some research. Not In Front of the Children is the …

The Children's Hour Revisited: The Children's Television Act Of 1990, Diane Aden Hayes

Federal Communications Law Journal

The Children's Television Act of 1990 was created to reduce advertising during children's programming and increase the number of educational programs for children. But by 1993 media watchers found that violations were frequent, and that what was purported to be educational television was often little more than cartoons. This Note argues that the apparent failure of the Act stems primarily from its vague standards. To correct these problems, more explicit regulations are necessary. Because new regulations can only go so far before they invade broadcasters' First Amendment rights, broadcasters and the FCC will have to compromise to create a workable …